AMBITIOUS holiday park plans for 70 lodges have been unanimously turned down by Maldon District Council.

The planning committee met to discuss the plans which had caused uproar with residents in and around Woodham Walter.

The Warren Estate plans included a 50-lodge holiday park, called Warren Lodges North, a secluded, luxury 20-lodge Wayside Retreat park, and alterations to the existing Bunsey clubhouse.

Applicant John Moran said: “Three years ago, the Warren Estate started to work to develop a unique holiday venue for the Maldon area, an activity-focused, short-break destination of the highest quality.

“Based broadly on the Centre Parcs model, it has been designed to encourage adults and children from all over the UK to visit.

“In normal times, this project would represent a huge new contribution to the local economy. We do not believe the economic benefit has been given due weighting.

“We doubt any district council would not consider an application which delivers an immediate £7million pound investment into the local tourism economy.”

Woodham Walter Parish Council chairman James Rushton said the council and 182 other objectors did not want the plans to be approved, calling them “unsustainable”.

He said: “It lays outside of this village’s settlement boundary and as such represents an inappropriate development without justification. The application sites play an important role in creating and maintaining the intrinsic character and tranquillity of the rural setting.

“The development will destroy this important setting affecting the western end of the parish.

“There is no demonstrated or proven need for holiday lodges or that any such lodges will be accepted under the Go Active brand given the facilities and their size offered by the applicant.

“The lodges and associated infrastructure will have an urbanising impact, failing to protect the beauty by intruding into it with a loss of high-value landscapes.”

Mr Rushton added: “The stated employment levels are hypothetical and considered unrealistic, the stated financial benefits are hypothetical and not outweighing the detrimental, devastating effect on the countryside.

“There are no perceivable benefits to the community, just a major adverse impact, and there is no aesthetic value to the proposal.”

District councillors Jane Fleming, Richard Siddall, and Karl Jarvis all expressed concerns about the scale and environmental impact of the plans.

Maddie Thompson, who chaired the meeting, said: “I think this might be a very good facility, but I don’t think Woodham Walter is the right place to put it.”

The plans were refused unanimously.