Government officials called in to rule on controversial plans to turn Pentney Woods into a holiday park

Government officials have been called in to rule on controversial plans to turn a woodland into a holiday park which were blocked over fears it would harm wildlife.

Colin Pennington, through his firm Forestscape, wants to transform part of Pentney Woods into a tourist destination complete with a health centre, wild swimming lake and eco lodges.

But the scheme was blocked by West Norfolk Council last year after stirring anger among people living in the surrounding area.

People feared the scheme could destroy the habitats of otters, water voles and bats.

Members of the planning committee agreed and voted to refuse the project on the grounds Forestscape failed to prove it would not harm the environment.

The woodland has since been declared a community asset to protect it against future development.

However, Mr Pennington has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate – the Government department that presides over planning disputes – to overturn the decision.

In a submission to officials, his agent claims councillors failed to provide “sound, substantive and defensible evidence” to support their ruling.

The agent has submitted documents and reports to support their view that it would not have an adverse effect on the woodland and has proposed mitigation measures to minimise disruption to wildlife.

Mr Pennington’s appeal comes after his application became the focus of a standards hearing earlier this month.

Cllr Terry Parish, who was serving as the planning committee chairman at the time, has faced sanctions after he wrongfully meddled in the meeting last year.

Cllr Parish was unable to attend after being hurt in a car crash but he sent emails to his deputy, seemingly indicating how to vote on the applications.

He was found to have broken his code of conduct, after an investigation ruled his emails could be interpreted as attempts to “influence the decision-making process” and raise concerns about the integrity of the decision.

But despite the furore, Mr Pennington has not chosen to base his appeal argument on these grounds.