Councillors have taken a stand to protect an area of ancient woodland.

Members of Maidstone council’s planning committee voted unanimously to refuse permission for a luxury holiday park proposed for the middle of Reeds Wood at Cox Street in Detling.

It is not known exactly when, but at some time before 1983, the centre of the wood was hollowed out to create a horse grazing paddock that is connected to the Chestnut Wood Livery Stables in the site next door.

The owner of the stables, Kevin Rice, sought permission to turn the paddock into a “luxury holiday park” with spaces for six mobile caravans or motorhomes, and two three-bedroom safari lodges.

In addition, an existing barn on the site would be converted to a reception office, shower room and shop. The plan included a “swim pond.”

The idea was that horse-lovers could bring their animals with them to the park and stable them in the livery while they stayed at the holiday site.

But the wood lies at the heart of an interconnected series of ancient woods, and councillors feared that the development would not only have a “sterilising” effect on Reeds Wood, but would harm the passage of wildlife between the woodlands.

The council’s planning officers said the scheme was contrary to the policies of the Local Plan and was in an unsustainable location, with no public transport and unfavourable to walking or cycling because of a lack of pavements or street lighting.

It was also in the North Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where development should only be allowed if there are “wholly exceptional” circumstances.

The necessary widening of the access off Cox Street would also directly result in the loss of some trees.

Nevertheless, officers had recommended the scheme be approved, saying there could be significant benefits for tourism and the rural economy.

There was an objection from the Kent Downs AONB unit, from the Kent Wildlife Trust and from the nearest neighbour, who said the dark sky over the site, essential to wildlife, would be ruined.

Speaking for the applicant, Michael Tamsett argued that the proposal would result in the planting of 201 new trees, and 540 metres of hedgerow and lead to the creation of two ponds, that would add to the biodiversity of the site, but Cllr Tony Harwood (Lib Dem) said the noise, light, and pollution from vehicles would effectively sterilise the area.

He said the UK had only 2.4% of its natural woodland cover remaining and it was essential to preserve what was left.

He described the proposal as “absolutely beyond the pale.”

The application was supported by Detling Parish Council, but was opposed by the Detling and Thurnham ward councillor Stephen Thompson (Green).

Similar applications for the site had been refused twice before.

Councillors were also concerned about the traffic implications and the lack of passing places on the narrow lane for motorhomes and horse-boxes.

Cllr Harwood said: “We all know that whenever there is a problem on the A249, this road gridlocks – and that has happened frequently of late with all the roadworks at Stockbury.”

However, those issues were not included as a reason for refusal because KCC Highways had raised no objection.

The motion to refuse permission was put forward by Cllr Stuart Jeffery (Green).

Afterwards, Cllr Thompson, who is not a member of the planning committee, said: “While sympathetic to the need for sustainable business and employment even within the AONB, I had to speak up for the irreplaceable ecology of this ancient woodland.

“This development, while some efforts have been offered to reduce environmental harm, would still do great damage to the connections between the many woodlands on the North Downs plateau on which our wildlife depends. The Local Plan and nature policies require the preservation and improvement of the AONB.

“As in similar cases, planning officers tried to persuade councillors that limited environmental measures could make up for irreversible damage caused by increasing development.

“I am delighted that the committee were persuaded that this is not acceptable, and voted unanimously to reject the application.”