BRADFORD Civic Society has expressed its disappointment after a government inspector decided an "inappropriate" shop front can remain on a listed city centre building.

In 2011 Bradford Council approved plans for a replacement timber shop front on Grade II listed 6 Rawson Place, a building that dates back to the 1870s.

However, a glass and aluminium was built instead. Applicant Jamil Ashraf applied for retrospective planning permission to retain the shopfront, with some minor changes, but his efforts were refused by Bradford Council on three separate occasions.

The most recent refusal was in March. Mr Ashraf lodged an appeal against the refusal, taking the matter out of Bradford Council's hands and leaving the fate of the building to a government appointed planning inspector.

Now that inspector, Elaine Gray, has overturned the Council's decision, meaning the shop front can remain.

The decision comes as Bradford Council is due to start work on its Townscape Heritage Scheme - a £2 million, lottery funded project to restore areas of the city centre, including Rawson Place, to its Victorian heritage.

Si Cunningham, Chair of the Bradford Civic Society, said the decision seems to ignore the work being done to improve the city centre's listed buildings.

The shop unit has been empty for several years, despite an "opening soon" sign that has been hanging on the frontage for much of that time.

When Bradford Council officers had refused the plans, they said: "The use of an inappropriate material for the shopfront frames and a lack of detail does not achieve the necessary improvements to the character of the conservation area or the appearance of the listed building.”

But the appeal decision said: "A modern replacement shopfront has been fitted on the ground floor, which is characterised by aluminium framing of a basic design and large areas of glazing.

"The excessive depth of the fascia is out of keeping in relation to the modest proportions of the shopfront."

They said the slight shopfront changes, including restoring a pilaster, would improve the appearance of the building.

Their decision adds: "The Council object to the scheme on the grounds that the aluminium frames, either retained or modified, are not appropriate to the character or age of the listed building. That is undoubtedly the case, and I agree that aluminium framing of this kind offers little scope for the detailing that would likely have characterised the shopfront that historically existed at the property.

"However, providing that the aluminium framing was retained or reinstated with the existing profile and appearance, this would not, to my mind, bring about a material change to the character of the listed building."

In response to the decision, Mr Cunningham said: “It’s a bit disappointing given that the inspector hasn’t taken into account all the proactive work being done at a local level to spruce up the northern quarter’s heritage buildings and make them more attractive for future usage – specifically through the Townscape Heritage scheme.

“We have a knowledgeable conservation team and a comprehensive shopfront design guide in place, so it shouldn’t be that difficult to get this sort of thing right first time in Bradford.

“The Civic Society has made calls for the city centre design guide to be updated and made more accessible.”

The Telegraph & Argus contacted Bradford Council for a comment, but has yet to receive a response.