The Environment Agency has raised concerns over a plan to create a 49-cabin lakeside holiday park near Selby.
It has lodged an objection to Miles Leslie Properties Ltd’s proposal to develop a ten-hectare parcel of land with “no defined use” off Bawtry Road, which features two lakes surrounded by trees.
Planning documents submitted to North Yorkshire Council state the development would not include features such as a manager’s home, clubhouse, restaurant and shop as the ethos of the proposal is to support the local economy and businesses in Selby and the surrounding area.
The application states there is “strong evidence” the scheme would be popular because of the strategic location of the development in relation to road and rail connections and that there is a need for holiday accommodation in the area to offer an alternative to hotels.
“The proposed development will deliver tourism-related development in Selby, providing additional accommodation close to popular facilities for visiting people,” a design statement says.
“The owner of the site aims to provide a high quality environment for users of the site and this is often lacking in this sector with operators concerned more about the intensity of a site but there is a clear intent from the owner to provide a bespoke environment for future guests.”
However, the location is a designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC).
And Selby Town Council has objected to the scheme on numerous grounds, including concerns that it could lead to contaminated surface water running into the SINC’s ponds.
A North Yorkshire Council ecologist has added the proposal lacks information to demonstrate that the proposals are capable of protecting the current ecological interest of the site.
‘More vulnerable’
The Environment Agency has confirmed the site lies within Flood Zones 2 and 3, with a medium or high probability of flooding and that holiday lodges are considered to be a more vulnerable land use.
An agency spokesman said the applicant would need to demonstrate there were no other alternative sites for the development within an area to be decided by North Yorkshire Council.
He added: “To overcome our objection, the applicant should submit an flood risk assessment which demonstrates that the development is safe without increasing risk elsewhere. Where possible, it should reduce flood risk overall.”
The agency’s letter of objection added if the council wants to approve “this application for major development contrary to our flood risk objection”, it must hold talks with the government body and refer the application to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.
It concludes: “A failure to follow this statutory process could render any decision unlawful, and the resultant permission vulnerable to legal challenge.”