®Planning appeal decision
9 Ringway, Garforth, Leeds, LS25 1BJ
‘There is a garden wall around the garden and I have replaced a part of that wall around the property for security and privacy purposes.’ This
- Authority
- Leeds City Council
- Appeal type
- householder · Householder (HAS)
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- other · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Colebourne S
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the dwelling and the street scene
- the effect of the proposed development on highway safety
What decided it
The small scale of the proposal, high-quality materials, limited length, and the quiet nature of the cul-de-sac road with good visibility meant the development did not result in significant harm to character, appearance or highway safety.
Plan policies cited: Policy P10 of the Core Strategy (as amended by the Core Strategy Selective Review 2019), Policy GP5 of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan (Review 2006), Policy N25 of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan (Review 2006), Policy T2 of the Core Strategy, Policy HDG1 of the Householder Design Guide SPD (2012)
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.