At last - a bit of (very) good news for Lidl-fronted consortium seeking to redevelop Pleasure Island

Light at the end of a very long tunnel for Pleasure Island consortium?

IT looks like there has been a major breakthrough for the consortium seeking to develop the former Pleasure Island theme park.

Up until now, the Environment Agency had always opposed the project for fear that coastal or fluvial flooding could swamp the site with potentially catastrophic consequences.

But it has emerged this week that the agency is now satisfied that the consortium’s commitment to a raft of precautionary measures is sufficient for it to withdraw its objection.

The proposal is for a Lidl supermarket, a drive-thru coffee shop, 272 holiday cabins, two hotels and various other retail, leisure and amusement buildings. 

There remain other objections - not least from  some nearby residents, concerned about highways matters, from a nearby supermarket chain and from organisations such as Natural England and the Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust who fear the loss of rare bird and butterfly species that live either on or around the site.

Sadly, many mature trees - though not those adjacent to the site boundary with Kings Road - would need to be felled to make way for the development.

However, these considerations may not be deemed sufficient to outweigh the obvious economic benefits of the ambitious scheme.

As well as  German-owned supermarket chain Lidl, the consortium comprises two property developers with existing housebuilding and other interests in North East Lincolnshire.

However, they have entrusted the Leeds office of planning and development agents Lichfields to progress their application which has been sitting with North East Lincolnshire planning department since as far back as December 2022.

Now that the EA has withdrawn its objection, the consortium may be emboldened to ask NELC to determine the application without more ado - perhaps  brimful of confidence that a planning decision  will come down in their favour.                                            

Most, if not all, of these boundary trees would be maintained but most others within the site face the chop