A CONTROVERSIAL plan to build houses on a watermeadow that floods in heavy rain has been thrown out.

Campaigners have fought a long battle to stop a 67-home estate going up at Granny Lane in Mirfield.

The proposals by Wakefield-based Miller Homes have pinballed back and forth between various committees at Kirklees Council.

Now they have been refused.

It was a tight victory for locals opposed to the plan, with the seven-member Strategic Planning Committee voting 4-3.

Planning officers said none of the houses being planned would be built in the area of land worst affected by flooding.

But councillors said they were not confident that measures being suggested to tackle flooding would work.

Clr Nigel Patrick (Con, Holme Valley South) said: “I don’t believe that this site should have houses on it.

“If this committee approves this and the site floods, this committee is responsible.”

Next phase of massive warehouse scheme is approved

Speaking after the committee’s decision, a spokeswoman for campaign groups Save Mirfield and Granny Lane Area Action Group (GLAAG) said common sense had prevailed.

She added: “It was very tense this afternoon but we are grateful to those who voted to refuse.

“Our faith in the system has received a boost as a result. After almost two years of hard work we have achieved our goal of getting this ridiculous development refused.

“We are feeling very emotional and a few happy tears have been shed.”

The scheme was supported by council planners as it is allocated for housing in the authority’s Local Plan, which aims to build 31,000 new homes across the district over the next decade.

The committee was urged to use “wisdom and courage” to refuse the application by locals who spoke of their personal experiences of flooding in the area.

Cheryl Tyler, chair of Save Mirfield, said the local community had “no confidence” in the development proposals and that the site was “unsustainable”.

She said: “Existing residents believe that they are considered acceptable collateral damage and new residents will be put at risk.”

Veronica Maher, who lives close to the development land and regularly witnesses flooding on Granny Lane and Steanard Lane, said: “What more evidence do we need to convince you that the meadow should be

preserved?”

She added: “Everyone living here is frightened and distressed when

the flood alerts arrive ever more frequently.

“Councillors, you have the opportunity today to prevent this horrible situation happening to more families who, yes, need homes, but ethically is that at any cost?”

Planning lawyer Katherine Hall, acting for residents, said that when determining any planning application, local planning authorities such as Kirklees should ensure that flood risk is not increased elsewhere.

She added: “My clients’ concern is not to obstruct new development but to ensure new development proposals adhere to planning legislation and secures protection for people and property – existing and new – from flooding.

And in response to fears over flooding, water engineer Paul Farndale said development on the Granny Lane would not worsen existing flooding from nearby becks or from the River Calder.

He said: “What we’re not saying is that Granny Lane will never flood again, because there are existing problems.”