RESIDENTS have been left outraged after controversial plans for more than 130 homes were approved by a Government planning inspector.

The project to build the 132-home estate on a 21-acre site between Valley Farm Holiday Park, in Valley Road, and Happy Valley Bowling Club in Holland-on-Sea has been given the go ahead.

The plans include a new sports field, as well as a new access road and roundabout from Sladbury’s Lane.

Residents have been fighting for more than ten years to prevent homes from being built in Sladbury’s Lane, which they believe cannot cope with extra traffic.

They also say it will increase the risk of flooding.

Proposals to earmark greenfield land along the country lane for 2,600 homes in 2011 were dropped after more than 5,000 people signed petitions opposing development.

It is now feared the inspector’s decision could “open the floodgates” for more homes.

Holland Residents’ Association councillor Joy Broderick said: “The land owners legal team, headed up by a QC, gave the government Planning Inspectorate the ammunition it needed to completely annihilate Tendring Council’s planning department.

“The Holland Residents’ group on Tendring Council, backed up by the hard work of the Sladbury’s Lane protest group, stopped any development on this land for over ten years.

“Suddenly over the past 18 months something changed to give the land owner the incentive to launch an appeal.

“The Local Plan clearly identified this land as outside the settlement boundary and inside the protected green space – that has been totally ignored.”

“Why do we need a planning committee a planning department or a Local Plan at all?

“The Government’s localism policy is jack booting over local democracy.”

Tendring Council originally refused the application in August last year, but Government inspector Harold Stephens has now overturned that decision.

The inspector found Tendring Council was unable to demonstrate a Government-stipulated five-year supply of housing land, which means there is a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”.

Mr Stephens said: “I have found the council is unable to demonstrate a clear and robust five year supply of housing land.

“While I recognise the positive steps the council is taking towards addressing the shortfall, in the context of the lack of a five-year supply, I find the shortfall to be significant and not marginal.

“There are no significant and demonstrable harms to outweigh the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

“The proposal would not be unacceptably harmful to the character and appearance of the area or the local green gap.”

Nigel Brown, the council’s communications manager, said: “The council is seeking legal advice over whether to challenge this decision.”