> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://lichfieldlive.co.uk/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Councillors reject plans for homes in Kings Bromley which would have been “flirting with disaster” - URL: https://lichfieldlive.co.uk/councillors-reject-plans-for-homes-in-kings-bromley-which-would-have-been-flirting-with-disaster/ - Published: 2026-04-23T06:09:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-04-22T18:32:13.000Z - Description: Councillors have rejected plans to build up to 70 homes, claiming that approving the development in a flood-prone area would be “flirting with disaster”. - Author: Jonathan Sutton, Local Democracy Reporter - Tags: #wp, #wp-post, #Import 2026-07-22 18:11, News COUNCILLORS have rejected plans to build up to 70 homes, claiming that approving the development in a flood-prone area would be “flirting with disaster”. The proposed scheme on Lichfield Road in Kings Bromley would have included 28% affordable housing, a community orchard and three play areas. But the planning committee at Lichfield District Council heard concerns over the risk of flooding. However, evidence had been supplied from the developer – Richborough Estates – that the risk could be mitigated against. There was also no objection from the local flood authority, but the the plans did draw criticism from Kings Bromley Parish Council, the nearby cricket club and 83 local residents. Speaking at the committee meeting, local resident Leanne O’Neill said: > “Flooding is an ongoing and serious issue in this area. My property experiences flooding annually, despite being classified as low risk on official assessment. > > “Despite over £30,000 of investment in flood defences, we are currently required to pump water into this field as per guidance from the Environment Agency. > > “This development would be expected to significantly worsen local flood risk. During severe events, flooding has already completely cut access in the village, preventing even emergency vehicles from entering or leaving.” The application was called in for consideration by the committee by Cllr Richard Cox, who claimed that the development would disproportionately increase the size of Kings Bromley. He also he raised concerns over highway safety, flooding and loss of countryside. Cllr Martyn Punyer added: > “The site is in Lichfield District Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment deemed as not suitable for development. This means the council has previously considered this site and rejected it. > > “It comes forward not because the requirement for our land for future development has changed in recent months – as the land was deemed not suitable the fact that the numbers game has changed does now not make it suitable.” The affordable housing on the site would have been split between social rent and shared ownership. The application’s agent Neil Cox said that despite the land being located outside the development boundary, it is bound on two sides by the existing residential area of the village. Addressing the flood risk, he said: > “All proposed development is located in flood zone one, where flood risk is at its lowest. > > “The applicant has provided a significant level of evidence at this outline stage, including flood risk assessment and sustainable drainage strategy. Additionally, hydraulic modelling has been undertaken by flood risk modellers to provide further consideration of the implications for the Crawley Brook. > > “They provide certainty that the proposals would result in no reduction in floodplain capacity or floodplain conveyance and the development will not adversely impact the flood risk of land or property up and downstream.” Despite this, councillors raised concerns over the flood risk in the area. Cllr Thomas Marshall said: > “I think the fact that we have spent quite a lot of time discussing flooding tells me that there is a flood issue. > > “I know that it’s being mitigated, I know it’s been fully explained, but I think the fact that it raised its ugly head does concern me. > > “I think we’re flirting with disaster in a way due to the very fact that we know there’s a problem but we think we can mitigate it.” The planning committee voted to refuse planning permission, against the recommendation of planning officers.