- Decision
- dismissed, 28 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: F Harrison
- Authority
- Leeds (Yorkshire and the Humber)
- Appeal reference
- 6010755
- Application reference
- 25/07470/FU
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- An outdoor TV screen in the external seating area of a public house; the screen had already been installed
- Site context
- inside settlement
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- P3
- Development plan policies
- Leeds Unitary Development Plan (Review 2006) GP5, Leeds Core Strategy (as amended 2019) P10
- Main issues
- living conditions of neighbours (noise and disturbance)
Summary
An outdoor TV screen in a pub garden in Meanwood, Leeds was dismissed. Customer noise during screened sport would be frequent, unpredictable and at odds with a quiet residential area, contrary to local policies GP5 and P10 and to P3 of the Framework. The pub's social role carried only modest weight.
Issues and findings
- Transition. "there are no material changes in policy emphasis relevant to the substance of the appeal" (DL ¶2).
- Noise, P3: CONFLICT. "The disturbance the proposal would create is indicative of noise in the wrong place at the wrong time" (DL ¶14). The proposal "would therefore be contrary to Framework Policy P3 which requires development to be appropriate for its location, taking into account the likely effects on living conditions and to avoid unacceptable levels of noise" (DL ¶14).
- Control by condition. "there is no mechanism before me to limit the screening of events to infrequent tournaments" (DL ¶7).
What made the difference
The noise that mattered came from customers, not the speakers. Hours and speaker volume could be conditioned, but cheering could not, and nothing limited how often sport would be shown. Evidence of how often past screenings had taken place, or an enforceable cap on events, was missing.
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| P3 | conflict | impulsive cheering and shouting during screened sport, on a frequent basis, in a relatively tranquil residential area (background 40 dB LA90); significant observed adverse effect level crossed; noise from the screen itself could be controlled by condition, customer noise could not (DL 5-9, 12, 14) | |
| HC4 | benefit | mapped: no Framework policy cited; social role of the public house given "modest weight"; economic benefit unquantified, which limited its weight (DL 16) |
Key facts
- Outdoor screening had taken place for about six years under temporary permissions, but there was no evidence of how often (DL 13)
- No mechanism to limit screenings to infrequent international tournaments, so league fixtures and other sport could be shown (DL 7)
- Noise Management and Customer Dispersal Plan could not address sporadic cheering during a match (DL 10)
- One formal noise complaint (amplified music); several objections describing nuisance from previous screenings (DL 11)
- Switch paragraph says there are no material changes in policy emphasis relevant to the appeal; no consultation is recorded (DL 2)
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.