A proposal to build four bungalows on a narrow strip of woodland in Carpenders Park has been unanimously thrown out by councillors.

Developers Masma Ltd and Clovercourt Properties Ltd had applied to build the homes in Sandpit Woods between St George’s Drive and railway lines.

The application has received 95 letters from residents living nearby as well as objections from Watford Rural Parish Council, the Carpenders Park Residents Association, Hertfordshire Highways and Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust.

At a council planning committee meeting last Thursday (February 21) councillors branded the application "absolutely incredible" and "outrageous".

Lib Dem council leader Councillor Ann Shaw said: "I find this an absolutely incredible application; I don’t know who is going to speak in favour of it.

"It is dangerous, it is so blatantly dangerous."

Conservative leader Councillor Chris Hayward added: "This is an outrageous application and the sooner we dismiss it the better."

Specific concerns aired in the report included vehicles turning into Little Oxhey Lane where, under current plans, motorists would have just one third of the minimum required visibility to the right hand side.

The report also notes objections from Network Rail that the development encroaches onto operational railway land, a claim understood to be disputed by the developer.

Earlier in the week Clovercourt had received a caution from Three Rivers District Council in relation to the felling of protected trees on the site in 2012.

Robert Tunwell from the Carpenders Park Residents’ Association spoke out on behalf of the group saying the trees provided St George’s Drive residents with an important barrier from noise and pollution generated by the railway.

Pam Hames, Lib Dem councillor for Carpenders Park, said: "Having visited the area on the weekend and saw the tree clearance I can only agree with the lady who said they are heartless developers.

"The proposed entrance is in such a dangerous position and I agree with Hertfordshire County Council that it shouldn’t be allowed."

With the refusal of the planning application it is understood that an order will now be made for the demolished trees to be replaced on the site.