Bat roost could frustrate homes plan

A regionally important bat roost could be among the reasons a proposed development of nine homes in East Devon fails to get the go-ahead.

Planners considering the scheme for nine properties – four of which would be affordable – opted to recommend the plan be rejected, partly due to the impact on important wildlife in the area.
East Devon District Council’s planning committee visited the site at West Hayes, in West Hill, outside Ottery St Mary, to help make their decision.
While planning officers felt the impact on wildlife could be mitigated, the planning committee raised the bat roost and corridor as one of four reasons to recommend the scheme for rejection.
A report prepared for councillors outlined that the site is a priority habitat for woodland, and is within a maternity roost sustenance zone for lesser horseshoe bats, adding it was a “regionally important bat roost” with importance for “significant varieties of bats”.
However, the outcome of the proposal is complicated by the fact the applicant – Paul Hunt – has already filed an appeal with the government’s Planning Inspectorate against the council for its failure to decide on his plan within the required timeframe.
This means the planning committee could only outline the reasons why it wanted to refuse the plans, and those will now be forwarded to the Planning Inspectorate for consideration.
The planning committee noted the proposed development was located beyond the boundary where housing is permitted, and felt it would result in the loss of protected trees while putting pressure on the future of others.
Crucially, several members highlighted the plight of the area’s bats, noting the current woodland where the houses are proposed offered an important eco-system for the creatures.
Councillor Ian Barlow (Independent, Sidmouth Town) said that even though the council was behind in its housing targets set by the government, it was important to protect the area’s biodiversity.
“I can’t agree with the planning officers’ view to propose approval as to me, we have built houses nearby and pushed what’s left of the wildlife into the top corner against the road and now we are going into that space too,” he said.
He added that the “national importance” of the site’s wildlife meant it was “worth protecting”, noting that he felt there would also be pressure on any remaining trees if development occurred in the area.
“The tilted balance [which puts pressure on building homes where councils are behind target] is there but I think the balance has swung too far against wildlife and the greenery of the area, which is what West Hill is about,” Cllr Barlow added.
Fellow committee member Councillor Brian Bailey (Conservative, Exmouth Littleham) questioned whether there was actually demand for new homes in West Hill.
“There are at least 40 properties for sale in West hill and it has been that number for a considerable time,” he said.
“They are not selling like hot cakes, so it appears there is no demand for houses in West Hill as 40 are still for sale, meaning I can’t see a reason to  build more on a nationally protected site when there are homes available.”
Senior planning officer Wendy Ormsby confirmed that the proposed location was outside the built-up area boundary where the council’s existing local plan designates that development is acceptable.
She also noted that a previous scheme for five homes had been refused in 2024.
The members of the committee who went on the site visit voted unanimously to recommend the scheme be rejected, and this vote along with its reasons will now be sent to the Planning Inspectorate for determination.