SKIPTON'S multi-million pound flood alleviation scheme could be delayed for another year after councillors refused to accept changes to planning consent.

The Environment Agency, which has yet to appoint a contractor, wanted permission to provide details of land reinstatement off the A65 and Otley Road, where it is to build a storage reservoir, after, and not before, work got under way.

It also wanted to reduce the length of time it was required to manage landscaping at the four town centre sites where more minor works are to take place, from ten to five years.

But councillors at Monday's planning meeting of Craven District Council went against officers' advice to agree to the changes, with some casting doubt on the whole £13.8 million project and accusing the agency of having little regard for one of the landowners, the Stapleton farming family.

Project manager for the agency, Will Benedikz, said providing details of the restoration programme at Waller Hill Beck could properly be done within 12 months of work getting under way, but that providing it before could see the whole project taking another year to finalise and up to two-and-a-half years to complete.

He said there would be a significant impact on the Stapletons and explained money for the scheme had only recently been confirmed, which meant it had not been possible to appoint a main contractor, although he hoped that would happen this month.

Weather would also play a part and delays to the start of work, together with more consultation with the Stapletons, could delay the start for 12 months.

Councillors were advised that planning authorities were now being told not to impose pre-commencement of development conditions and to accept the changes.

Farmer George Stapleton said the Waller Hill Beck storage reservoir site, off the A65 and Otley Road, covered around 40 acres and represented half of the land in his family's agricultural use.

He said the land was his "bread and butter" and compared the expected earth works to that of quarry digging. He said he could see no reason why the agency should not stick to the original condition.

He said no-one should start work on land before knowing how they were going to restore it and asked for reassurances that money be put to one side for that purpose, to protect against the project running out of funding.

Most councillors agreed with Mr Stapleton and could see no reason why the agency should not produce a restoration programme first.

"Bearing in mind the questionable funding of the whole project, the farmer needs the protection of the original consent," said Cllr Ady Green.

After the meeting, the Environment Agency said it had hoped to start work in May, but that it was now looking at late summer. It would not be appealing the decision.