Planning for and mitigating noise issues
Whether you love pickleball for its energetic, fast pace or hate it for the constant rhythmic, popping noise of the plastic ball, its status as one of the fastest-growing recreational sports in the United States is undeniable. According to USA Pickleball, 4,000 new locations were added in 2024, contributing to a total of nearly 16,000 new courts nationwide (Figure 1).
While pickleball's main attractions are its affordability, its appeal across generations, its suitability for various physical abilities, and its adaptability to different seasons, this explosion in popularity has led to an increasing number of noise complaints from nearby residents. The impact of a plastic pickleball on a paddle can register between 70 and 100 decibels from 100 feet away, which is equivalent to a vacuum cleaner or a motorcycle. Consequently, communities are frequently challenged to implement or reevaluate their noise ordinances. Some are even facing court-ordered sanctions to stop outdoor play altogether due to the nuisance created by the continuous, reverberating “pop, pop, pop.” Therefore, the objective of the following study was to find ways to reduce the noise to a level acceptable to residents: in other words, not to exceed 30 decibels, or the sound equivalent of a whisper or leaves rustling in the wind.
In 2024, the Town of Wellesley, Mass., an affluent suburb west of Boston, engaged the Weston & Sampson design team to develop planning and siting criteria for pickleball courts. These standards would help the town determine if placing new courts in its parks, schools, or other municipal properties would adversely affect nearby residents. The development of these criteria was a public, community-driven process based on existing use, future-demand projections, programming needs, emerging national standards, and acoustic science.
Wellesley, a community of nearly 30,000 residents in just 10.5 square miles, has struggled to find available, town-owned open space to meet its recreational demands without having to purchase private land. To develop the evaluation standards, the Weston & Sampson team began assessing more than a dozen town-owned parcels, including parks, open spaces, school properties, and other municipal facilities. These sites included Wellesley’s only standalone pickleball court, nine hybrid courts overlaid with other sports like tennis and basketball, and unprogrammed space large enough to accommodate at least one new court.
A survey of nearly 1,000 Wellesley residents revealed a weekly pickleball participation rate of 49% (Figure 2). Considering the national average of one pickleball court for every 2,000 residents, the team recommended that the town construct an additional four dedicated pickleball courts over time. This would help alleviate the programming and availability pressures that the town’s recreation department faced. The central question, therefore, was how best to determine where the courts should be located without negatively impacting neighbors.
Determining Site-Selection And Noise-Mitigation Criteria
The Weston & Sampson team needed to consider all factors that could affect the siting, and therefore the sound reverberation, of any new pickleball courts. These factors included:
- The distance to property lines and residences
- The topography and its effect on how sound is transmitted
- The number of courts
- Site lighting
- Site accessibility
- Land-development costs
- Traffic impacts
- The potential for future expansion
- Conflicts with other programmed uses, like tennis and basketball
- School hours
- Availability
- Parking
Collectively, these were the criteria most important to the community, as they have the greatest effect on nuisance noise and quality of life for abutters. Team members also considered other criteria, such as year-round vegetation, potential sound barriers, and the distance to water, which can reflect sounds over greater distances.
In collaboration with an acoustic engineer, the team determined that any court must be located at least 800 feet from a residential home to meet the town’s requested maximum noise level of 30 decibels. It quickly became apparent that virtually none of the proposed properties could accommodate such a significant setback, making additional noise mitigation necessary for siting any new pickleball court.
The team also evaluated the elevation of proposed courts relative to neighboring properties. Recognizing that sound travels upwards as it reverberates from its source, any new court would need to be situated at a higher elevation than adjacent residences. Land development and infrastructure costs were also considered, including the impact of working within or near environmentally sensitive and habitat-resource areas and the need for mitigation.
Project leaders explored public-safety requirements at municipal properties like public-works facilities and pump stations, but ultimately ruled them out due to limited public parking and restricted access for safety and security reasons. They also examined potential overlap with existing courts at school campuses; however, limited availability during school hours reduced the potential for maximizing public use.
Finally, they considered the use of acoustic sound barriers at various heights and distances. While these barriers can significantly reduce noise in certain scenarios, they do not eliminate it. Additionally, unintended concerns come with the use of sound barriers, such as poor air circulation and poor safety from blocked views into the courts. In the end, only one site met all the criteria established by the broader community. All of the other proposed sites were dismissed due to the inability to achieve proper noise mitigation or to provide the necessary support services to justify the construction of new pickleball courts.
On the surface, it may seem straightforward to evaluate and determine siting criteria to mitigate the “ping-ponging” noise from pickleball. However, achieving a placement that satisfies the community’s diverse needs involves more than measuring decibels and distances. It requires balancing the growing demand for courts and the desire to preserve the peace and sanity of those living within earshot of the pickleball courts.