Planning appeal decision
1 Grimscar Avenue, Birkby, Huddersfield, HD2 2TY
Planning appeal 3276517 at 1 Grimscar Avenue, Birkby, Huddersfield, HD2 2TY (Kirklees Metropolitan Council) was dismissed on 16 December 2021 by Inspector Wilson L, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether or not it has been demonstrated that there are no sequentially preferable sites on which the retail unit could be accommodated and the proposal's effect on the vitality and viability of the Birkby Local Centre.
proposed retail unit with flat over
- Authority
- Kirklees Metropolitan Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- retail · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Wilson L
- Postcode
- HD2 2TY
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether or not it has been demonstrated that there are no sequentially preferable sites on which the retail unit could be accommodated and the proposal's effect on the vitality and viability of the Birkby Local Centre
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including the setting of the nearby Birkby Conservation Area
- The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of occupiers of 2 Bromley Road (outlook), 3 Grimscar Avenue (outlook and light), and 1 Grimscar Avenue (private amenity space)
- Whether the proposed development would provide a satisfactory standard of accommodation for its future occupiers, with particular regard to private amenity space
- Whether or not it has been demonstrated that the proposal would have an acceptable effect on highway safety, having regard to parking provision
What decided it
The appellant's failure to demonstrate compliance with the Sequential Test for retail development outside the defined local centre, combined with multiple harms to character, heritage setting, neighbour amenity, future occupier accommodation standards, and highway safety, with limited public benefits to justify these harms.
The limited public benefits of providing a new retail unit and flat did not outweigh the harm to the Conservation Area setting, character and appearance, living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, accommodation standards for future occupiers, and highway safety concerns.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy LP13Policy LP24(a)Policy LP35Policy LP24(b)Policy LP21Policy LP22
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 199Paragraph 7Paragraph 12Paragraph 16Paragraph 9
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Kirklees
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Allowed19 October 202660130568A Grove Terrace, Birkenshaw, Bradford, BD11 2LY
- Allowed25 September 2026600567047 Huddersfield Road, Mirfield, WF14 8AE
- Allowed16 September 2026601237033 Stainecross Avenue, Huddersfield, HD4 5HZ
- Allowed3 September 202660125271 Charnwood Bank, White Lee, Batley, WF17 8PY
- Allowed6 February 20263359129Land at Cliff Hill, Denby Dale, West Yorkshire, HD8 8RZ
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®