A property developer has had plans for a sprawling seven-bedroom mansion blocked after six protected trees were mysteriously felled – but he insists he is not to blame.
Mohammed Tayyab bought a derelict care home in Bradford, West Yorkshire, for £355,000 in August 2021, with plans to bulldoze the eyesore building and replace it with a lavish detached home.
But his dream development has now been blocked by councillors, after it emerged that protected lime and horse chestnut trees were illegally felled from the site, which sits in a conservation area.
Town hall officials discovered that the trees had been deliberately uprooted and damaged during unauthorised excavation work at the site.
Councillors refused planning permission, claiming that doing so would effectively mean ‘rewarding criminal activity’, and open the floodgates to other developers cutting corners.
Mr Tayyab, described by backers as a ‘pillar of the community’, claims he had no knowledge that the trees were chopped down and insisted it happened before he purchased the site.
Mohammed Tayyab bought a derelict care home in Bradford, West Yorkshire, for £355,000 in August 2021, with plans to bulldoze the eyesore building and replace it with a lavish detached home
Mr Tayyab’s dream development has now been blocked by councillors, after it emerged that protected lime and horse chestnut trees were illegally felled from the site, which sits in a conservation area
Bradford Council said the six trees were uprooted without consent between 2012 and November 2021, ‘around the same time that the property was last purchased.’
It said that regardless of whether Mr Tayyab was involved in lopping down the mature trees, he was responsible for replacing them as the landowner – making his housebuild impossible.
Town hall officials concluded: ‘It would be inappropriate to grant a planning permission which in effect rewards the unlawful removal of protected trees.’
Despite offering to plant varied tree species on the land in Oak Mount, the council has applied for a legal order against Mr Tayyab to replace the trees in exactly the same location.
At a heated council meeting, Cllr Sinead Engel said: ‘I can’t bring myself to sanction a plan that rewards criminal activity.
‘Regardless of who committed the crimes – the person who did it has benefitted if it has increased the value of the land.
‘Before this building shut it was a 10-bedroom property. I’m struggling to understand why, with a bit of imagination, someone could not just create an amazing family home without trampling over mature trees.’
Councillor Paul Sullivan added: ‘If we allow this then everyone is just going to rip trees down for their own benefit and let the site look like a wreck before they put plans in.
‘We can’t set that precedent.’
The former care home has stood derelict for nearly a decade and has become a hotspot for fly-tipping and antisocial behaviour, with evidence of deliberate fire damage.
Mr Tayyab had wanted to build a ‘substantial’ two-storey home boasting ensuites, open-plan living, a study, utility room and even a disabled-access ground floor bedroom.
Mr Tayyab’s three previous planning applications were also rebuffed, council papers show
Mr Tayyab had wanted to build a ‘substantial’ two-storey home boasting ensuites, open-plan living, a study, utility room and even a disabled-access ground floor bedroom.
His three previous planning applications were also rebuffed, council papers show.
The planning application, which generated just one objection, stated: ‘The existing site is vacant as a former registered group home and harms the appearance of the conservation area through its redundant appearance without maintenance and upkeep.
‘The proposed development provides an important opportunity to improve the appearance of the site and secure its optimum viable use.’
Councillor Safina Kause said the site had been derelict for eight years before the applicants bought it.
Voting in favour of granting planning permission, she said: ‘It is almost like planning officers don’t want to bring this property back into life. Why are they making it so difficult?
‘The applicants are being penalised for something they haven’t done. If this plan is refused, they will have no choice but to sell the property. I implore you to approve this application.’
A council report states: ‘The site has been altered over the years due to unauthorised works, excavation and tree removal, taking place which has detrimentally harmed the appearance of the site and the wider conservation area due to the loss and damaged caused to the boundary trees which collectively had significant amenity value.
‘The engineering works which have been carried out have destabilised the remaining mature trees. These works have resulted in the significant damage and loss of mature trees which has harmed the character and appearance of the conservation area.’
Under planning laws, chopping down trees in a conservation area without permission is a criminal offence, punishable by potentially unlimited fines.
