A supermarket’s unauthorised expansion over a residents’ car park showed a “lack of respect for authority”, councillors have said, as a retrospective planning application was firmly rejected.
Members of Bradford Council’s Planning Panel this week refused permission to retain an extension built by Asia Superstore on Kensington Street — constructed without consent and directly over parking spaces allocated to flats above the shop.
The panel heard that the 73-square-metre extension, erected in January to store and display fruit and vegetables, had been built across a six-space car park that was a condition of planning approval for eight flats created above the store in 2016.
Those spaces were intended for current and future residents — and have now been lost entirely.
The store occupies the ground floor of Kensington Hall, a 19th-century former church that has served many roles over the years, including as a community hall, dance studio and social club.
In June, the owners submitted a retrospective planning application, describing the extension as part of an effort to “modernise the property and better meet the needs of the local community”.
However, planning officers recommended refusal, citing both visual harm to the historic stone building and serious highway safety concerns.
Officers described the modern structure as “visually discordant” with the original building and warned that removing the parking spaces would place further pressure on surrounding streets.
Highways officers told the panel that the loss of parking would be “detrimental to highway safety”, particularly given that the spaces were a key condition of the flats’ approval.
Applicant Madihah Ashraf argued that the concerns could be resolved, saying nearby Willow Street offered ample on-street parking and that only one resident currently owned a car.
“There is a strong level of community support for this proposal,” she said, adding that the business was willing to make design changes to improve the extension’s appearance.
However, planning officer Andrew Moxon said the changes required would be so significant that the scheme would need to be resubmitted entirely.
He also challenged the argument that the parking was unnecessary.
“The fact that only one resident has a car could be down to the fact that the flats no longer have parking spaces,” he said.
“If parking was available, more people with cars might want to live there.”
While 74 letters of support had been submitted, councillors questioned the claimed economic benefits of the extension.
Mr Moxon said no evidence had been provided on job creation, adding:
“I’ve not received any information about employment figures.”
Councillor Atira Malik (Independent, Toller) supported the scheme, saying the extension contributed to local economic activity and had been well received by customers.
But panel chair Cllr Sinead Engel (Lab, Clayton and Fairweather Green) said the parking issue was insurmountable.
“I can’t imagine we would have granted permission for the flats without parking spaces — I can’t move past that issue,” she said.
Conservative councillor Chris Herd (Worth Valley) delivered one of the strongest rebukes.
“I’m very much for business and people working to improve themselves,” he said.
“But applications like this give a bad impression. There is no thought or respect for authority.”
Members voted to refuse the retrospective planning application, bringing the unauthorised extension under formal enforcement scrutiny.
