Controversial plans for 62 homes in Yorkshire village turned down - but it’s not over yet

The controversial plans relating to Cliff Hill have been going through the planning system since 2022, with several versions being turned down by Kirklees Council.

The latest went before the Strategic Planning Committee last month and was deferred due to concerns around the site’s coal mining past and how the coal would be disposed of.

At the meeting in May, the application included a ‘Unilateral Undertaking’ – a legal agreement stating that the site owner will not “dispose, sell, or appropriate” any of the coal removed or extracted from the site for “commercial purposes” or burn it.

However, members were not convinced that this would prevent a third party from selling or burning the coal that is extracted from the site, deferring the application so the wording could be strengthened.

The application appeared at Friday’s meeting (Jun 27) with updated wording to prohibit the burning of extracted coal or its sale for commercial purposes.

A further clause was included to prevent the owner from selling the site until a covenant (between the purchaser and the council) had been entered into, similarly restricting what may happen to coal removed from the site.

But the committee was still not content, and refused the plans on the same grounds as previous, with concerns around the removal of coal, number of vehicular movements, environmental impact and the unknown conditions beneath the site.

The application was turned down three votes to two, with councillors Andrew Pinnock, Sue Lee-Richards and Bill Armer voting to refuse it, and councillors Mohan Sokhal and James Homewood voting against refusal.

When an earlier iteration of the plans was thrown out by the committee last summer, the applicant lodged an appeal, arguing the grounds for refusal – which were the same as today – “cannot be justified”.

The appeal process remains ongoing regardless of today’s committee decision, the meeting heard, though the applicant could choose to withdraw it.

The strength of feeling in opposition to the plans was further demonstrated by the community today, with 160 objections made in response.

Fears including air and noise pollution, concern for the local environment and wildlife, mining plans and stability of the land were raised by residents and all three ward councillors.

Isabel Pritchett, who raised her family in the area, said she was speaking for the people “too afraid” to speak at the meeting who had “extreme concern”.

She added: “There are people who are terrified of what is going to happen and I know these people. I saw them when they were children, I taught them in Sunday school. I care a lot for this area and I care a lot for Denby Dale.”

Ms Pritchett continued: “In my opinion, if this committee decides to go ahead with this project, they’re going to put their heads into a noose – political, moral, legal and spiritual – and I don’t think that you can really afford that.”

Jane James also set out concerns on behalf of residents living on the outskirts of the site and said: “We’re hard working people, in hard working families. We’ve invested greatly into our homes.

"We are simply petrified about the application, without sounding too dramatic, and we fear for the safety of our homes.”