A GOVERNMENT inspector has overturned Bradford Council’s “unreasonable” decision to block a housing development in Wrose - and the taxpayer will have to foot the bill for the applicant’s appeal.

Earlier this year the Council had refused plans for 23 houses, including seven bungalows, to be built on land off Kings Drive.

The decision was made after objections from local residents, who claimed the new houses could lead to flooding and put an extra demand on roads.

Applicant Simon Holdsworth had appealed the judgement, and government planning inspector Alison Partington has now reversed Bradford Council’s decision, and said the development can go ahead - pointing out Bradford Council’s lack of a five year supply of housing land and saying the Council was unreasonable to refuse the plans against their own officers’ advice.

And she has also judged the Council will have to pay Mr Holdsworth the cost of the appeal, although an amount has not yet been revealed.

Among those who had objected to the scheme were Shipley MP Philip Davies, Wrose Parish Council and a number of residents of the area.

Council planning officers had recommended the plans for approval, despite the objections.

But at a meeting of the authority’s Regulatory and Appeals Committee in February, members also raised concerns, and voted unanimously to refuse the plans due to concerns about the cumulative effect the development would have on traffic, alongside other developments in the area.

In her appeal decision Mrs Partington said the houses would “not have a material impact on the highway network.”

The decision added: “In the absence of any substantive evidence to the contrary, given the evidence before me on the limited amount of traffic movements that would be generated by the proposal, I am satisfied that it would not have an unacceptable impact on the capacity of the local highway network.”

She also pointed out that Bradford Council had not demonstrated that they have allocated enough land for housing in the coming years.

The judgement says: “It has been highlighted that there is a significant number of dwellings proposed, or with planning consent, within both the immediate and the wider area.

“Nonetheless, the Council have confirmed that they currently cannot demonstrate a five year supply of housing land.

“This is clearly a matter of significant weight.

“Although the site is not previously developed land, it is located in an established residential area, with services and facilities accessible by means other than the private car. In the light of this, the proposal would make a valuable contribution to housing supply.”

Ordering the Council to pay costs to Mr Holdsworth, she added: “I consider that the Council’s refusal of planning permission, against officers advice, was unreasonable and prevented and delayed development which should have been permitted.”