Appeal 6003109

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. The main issue for which is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area with specific regard to protected trees.

The appeal property is a two‐storey detached dwelling located off a short spur from the main road within a predominantly residential setting. It has garden areas to the front, side and rear, and benefits from a substantial single storey side extension. The layout of the estate and appeal property were designed to accommodate the established line of trees subject to a group Tree Preservation Order (TPO) situated along [address], which forms the side boundary of the appeal site.

The trees subject to the TPO form a prominent, cohesive and attractive landscape feature. They are visible from a number of surrounding dwellings and public vantage points along [address]. Notwithstanding the time of year, when foliage is significantly reduced, it was evident from my site visit that this group of trees make a significant and positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

Of particular relevance to the scheme is the mature oak tree closest to the appeal dwelling and the proposed development. Owing to its stature, longevity and contribution to the wider tree line, it represents a key component of the group and of the green corridor formed along this boundary.

The proposal would encroach upon the crown spread of the oak tree, leading to the need for additional pruning. The appellant’s [name] and Impact Assessment acknowledges this. The Council’s Senior Arboricultural Officer advises that the tree is already suffering from low vigour, due to a lack of suitable rooting area, over-pruning, and ground disturbance within the Root Protection Area (RPA), most likely associated with construction of the existing ground floor extension atop which the appeal scheme would sit.

While there is disagreement between the main parties regarding whether the RPAs depicted within the appellant’s assessment have been plotted fully in accordance with the relevant [name], they were derived using the appropriate methodology. Nevertheless, and given the proximity of the proposal to the oak tree and its canopy, it is reasonably likely that leaf fall will occur onto the roof. This may lead to blocked gutters and accumulation of debris on the roof and around the roof lights. It would be difficult for the Council to resist applications to prune or fell in circumstances where damage is being sustained or nuisance is being caused.

Given the oak tree’s existing vulnerabilities, this additional encroachment and pruning pressure would introduce further stress, with the potential to adversely affect the tree’s long‐term health and structural integrity. The loss or further deterioration of such a prominent protected specimen would unacceptably reduce the positive contribution the group makes to the character and appearance of the area. In this context, the imposition of a condition requiring tree protection measures would not overcome the fundamental concerns, as it would not address the long‐term pressure to prune, arising from the scale and siting of the proposed development itself.

It appears that the works proposed under 22/03586/TPO relate to a different tree within the group, and not the oak one whose relationship with the proposal is of concern in this case. Routine tree maintenance approved is not comparable to the introduction of built development in close proximity to a protected tree, which has a materially different and potentially lasting impact. Accordingly, the application does not alter my findings on the harm identified.

As such, the proposed development would conflict with Policy EN5 of the Bradford Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2017 which seeks, amongst other things, to preserve and enhance the contribution trees make to the character of a settlement, or its setting or amenity of the built-up area. It is also contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework which recognises that trees make an important contribution to the character and quality of urban environments.

The appeal scheme would conflict with the development plan and material considerations do not indicate a decision other than in accordance therewith. I therefore recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.