VILLAGERS have called for properties on both sides of the river at Stamford Bridge to be protected from flooding - including the old Cornmill restaurant.
Residents spoke out at a public meeting called to discuss Environment Agency proposals to protect a number of businesses and homes which were flooded in both 1999 and 2000.
Villagers voted overwhelmingly for the Cornmill, and also Jo Barry's home and business and the Weir Caravan Park on the far bank of the river, to be included in the scheme.
They also called for more dredging of the River Derwent, believing that this would help reduce the flooding risk in the village.
But residents were more divided on the controversial issue of whether permanent or moveable defences should be installed alongside the picturesque Shallows in the centre of the village.
East Riding of Yorkshire Council planning committee recently deferred a planning application by the agency for permanent defences, partly because of concerns about the visual impact.
Traders whose premises have been inundated twice in the past three years hit out at the decision, saying they feared it would further delay the protection of their properties.
At the village meeting, which was attended by about 100 residents, 33 voted in favour of moveable defences, with 47 voting against, and others abstaining, said parish council chairman Hilary Saynor.
She said that of those in favour of permanent defences, some felt they were quite acceptable, some were concerned that moveable defences would be ugly while they were up and others had concerns about the reliability of moveable defences.
Those wanting moveable defences were worried about the impact of permanent defences on the appearance of the area.
She said Greg Knight, the MP for the area, had agreed to press for a delegation from the village to meet a Government minister to discuss their concerns. He had also said the Government should do more to press for European Union funding towards flood defence schemes.
She said an officer from the East Riding council told the meeting that discussions had been taking place with the agency.
And it was now intended to bring the matter back to a special planning meeting on December 13.
Updated: 12:29 Wednesday, November 28, 2001
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article