The growth of  padel in France  is one of the fastest-growing sectors in the European sporting landscape. In just a few years, pitches have multiplied in private clubs, municipal sports complexes, and new dedicated facilities. But a  national scientific study published in 2026  reveals a phenomenon that is still poorly documented:  A significant number of padel facilities are located too close to homes. which could expose local residents to noise pollution.

This research, conducted on a national scale, constitutes  the first detailed scientific analysis of the proximity between padel courts and housing in France .

With help by EchoPadel  et  ScienceDirect Let's take a closer look at a topic that sometimes causes a stir…

878 padel sites analyzed nationwide

The researchers built a comprehensive database from several official sources:

  • national inventory of sports facilities
  • specialized directories of padel clubs
  • geographical and cadastral data
  • INSEE statistical databases.

In total,  878 padel sites were identified and analyzed throughout metropolitan France .

Each site underwent precise spatial analysis using various tools.  Geographic Information Systems (GIS)  in order to measure:

  • the distance between the runways and residential buildings
  • direct visibility between the land and the dwellings
  • the urban density of the municipalities concerned.

271 sites identified as potentially problematic

Among these  878 facilities researchers identified  271 sites classified in a risk category , called “Class 1”, corresponding to situations where  at least one residential building is located within 100 meters of a plot of land with direct visibility .

This represents :

  •  271 out of 878 sites 
  • or,  30,87% of the installations studied .

In other words,  Nearly one in three padel courts in France could be built in a configuration likely to generate noise pollution for neighboring residents. .

The researchers emphasize that these situations do not necessarily mean that a conflict already exists, but that they constitute  potential risk configurations .

17,116 inhabitants live within 100 meters of a plot of land

The study did not stop at locating the sites. The researchers also estimated  the number of people living in the immediate vicinity of the facilities .

Using INSEE demographic data and the living area of ​​buildings, they estimated that:

  •  17,116 people live within 100 meters of a padel court 
  • is around  750,000 households .

The average distance between the dwellings and the land in question is  71,9 meters , with an average variation of approximately  ±21 meters .

This distance corresponds to a proximity sufficient for that  The impulsive sounds of padel can be clearly heard. .

7,471 buildings located within the immediate vicinity

To measure this exposure, the researchers identified  7,471 buildings located less than 100 meters from the 271 sites studied .

Among them :

  •  3,097 buildings are dwellings 
  •  4,374 buildings are non-residential  (shops, equipment, offices).

Detailed demographic analyses were finally carried out on  3,037 residential buildings with complete data .

These buildings were then analyzed according to their  direct visibility towards the grounds .

Direct visibility greatly increases exposure

A key element highlighted by the study is the  direct visibility between the land and the dwellings .

Among the properties analyzed:

  •  44,4% have direct visibility on the ground 
  •  55,6% are partially obscured by obstacles  (buildings, vegetation, terrain).

This distinction is important because direct visibility promotes:

  • the propagation of noise
  • the perception of ball impacts
  • the feeling of noise pollution.

Residents with direct visibility also live  on average closer to the fields , with an average distance of  65,8 meters , against  76,8 meters for the concealed housing units .

Residents sometimes live very close to the pitches.

The study also reveals that some housing units are located  at extremely short distances .

The proportion of buildings located  between 0 and 50 meters from the grounds  is significantly higher when the dwellings are in direct view.

  •  11,1% of visible dwellings are located less than 50 meters away 
  • salary.  5,6% when visibility is obscured .

In total,  4,370 inhabitants live in this very close area , and about  75% of them have direct visibility of the fields .

These situations represent the  configurations most sensitive in terms of noise pollution .

Small towns particularly affected

The study also shows that  The distribution of at-risk land varies according to the density of the municipalities .

The land located in the  small towns  appear particularly concerned.

For example:

  •  79 sites are located in the “small towns” category 
  • among them  34 are classified as at risk i.e  43,04% of installations in this category .

This rate is significantly higher than the national average.

For comparison:

  • about  major urban centers , only  26,09% of sites are classified as risky .

This difference is explained in particular by the more frequent installation of sports facilities  in the heart of residential areas in small towns .

Uneven geographical distribution

The study also reveals that  The distribution of at-risk areas varies across French regions. .

Some regions have a  overrepresentation of potentially problematic configurations .

For example:

  • the region  Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur  represents  14,24% of national sites More  22,88% of sites at risk .

Conversely, some regions such as:

  • le  Grand East 
  • le  Centre-Val de Loire 

present a lower proportion of land in this category.

The rapid growth of padel raises questions about urban planning

The authors emphasize that these results must be placed in the context of a  extremely rapid growth of padel .

In several European countries, the proliferation of land has sometimes occurred  faster than the implementation of appropriate urban planning frameworks .

Existing technical recommendations generally suggest  a minimum distance of approximately 100 meters between the land and the dwellings , in order to limit the impact of the impulsive noise generated by this sport.

When this distance is not respected, the sound impacts – particularly the bouncing of balls against windows and fences – can become  noticeable to local residents .

A challenge for the future of padel

This study constitutes  the first national quantification of residents' exposure to padel courts .

She does not conclude that there are systematic nuisances, but highlights  site configurations likely to generate tensions with local residents .

According to the authors, these results should serve as a basis for:

  • better infrastructure planning
  • a more systematic consideration of acoustic studies
  • the integration of location criteria into local sports policies.

In a context where padel continues to develop rapidly,  The question of integrating sports fields into the urban environment is becoming a central issue for the future of sport. .

 Source 

Dufour JC., Bonnet C. (2026)
 Managing padel-court siting near housing: guideline adherence shortfalls and populations at risk – national evidence from France 
City and Environment Interactions.

Franck Binisti

Franck Binisti discovered padel at the Club des Pyramides in 2009 in the Paris region. Since then, padel has been part of his life. You often see him touring France to cover major French padel events.

On the same subject

Tags