By John Baron
A homeowner has appealed against council decision to refuse ‘visually intrusive and overly dominant’ plans for a detached garage and car port at a home in Horsforth.
Applicant Andrew Sims, of Hall Lane, had unsuccessfully applied to Leeds City Council to build a detached garage with attached car port. Plans also include a new pedestrian access with gate and a new stone wall with pedestrian gate.
Council planning officers refused the proposals in February, saying they would be “visually harmful and would therefore fail to comply with the aims and intentions of both national and local policy and guidance”. There were also concerns over access.
But the applicant has appealed against the decision, and the matter will now be decided by an independent planning inspector.
In an appeal document, the applicant argues: “While the reasons for refusal are understood, there are valid grounds for reconsideration.”
It says the proposed garage has been “carefully designed to balance functionality, privacy, and visual harmony with its surroundings. It considers the needs of the residents while respecting local planning guidelines and the character of the area.
“The placement of the garage integrates seamlessly with the existing infrastructure, enhancing site functionality while maintaining a balanced relationship between built and green spaces..
“The design conforms to the Horsforth Neighbourhood Plan by safeguarding important long views and blending with the area’s architectural character. The proposal aims to maintain some openness towards Hall Lane.
“Compared to the previously approved carport, the proposed garage is a more discreet and contextually appropriate addition.
“Overall, this proposal provides a practical and well-integrated solution that respects both the needs of the residents and the planning framework.”
But Horsforth Town Council has continued its opposition to the proposals, adding: “We support the planning refusal put forward by Leeds City Council.
“The proposed development heavily contrasts with other properties nearby on Hall Lane whilst being in a prominent location on the junction of the A65/Hall Lane, and this, therefore, is why the proposed development runs contrary to policy.
“In addition, the applicant relies on the carport for improved privacy, limiting visibility and exposure. As an alternative, the previously planted hedges, if maintained, should be sufficient to provide this. There is therefore no need to construct a carport to achieve this objective.
“The proposed addition to the site could, in our view, be considered overdevelopment, and would impact the sense of openness of the view from the A65 to Hall Lane.”
The original planning application can be found here.