Plan for 63 homes lands on controversial ‘hedge destruction’ site

Developers are making a renewed bid for a 63-homes plan on land where a hedgerow was destroyed and efforts were made to protect mature trees from being cut down.

The prospect of homes on the site, based on land east of Sidmouth Road in Ottery St Mary, have previously proved controversial, but the location has become even more contentious after the unexpected removal of hedgerows and trees.
Back in December, Councillor Jess Bailey (Independent, Otter Valley) who represents the Ottery area on Devon County Council and East Devon District Council (EDDC), stood under one tree to prevent it being chopped down by contractors with chainsaws.
She also secured an emergency order to protect the remaining trees, and sought enforcement in relation to the hedgerow destruction.
A statement from the council, seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service, states that it believes “hedgerow regulations have been breached in this case”.
“This is because the works that have been carried out have removed most of the previously unmanaged hedgerow along the western boundary,” it said.
“There are some remaining tree stumps present along the western boundary that may rejuvenate, however, large sections of the hedgerow have been damaged or removed and will not regenerate.”
It added the presence of gnawed hazel nut “provides confidence the area was used as a resting site for hazel dormouse” meaning the hedge would be “considered as important due to the presence of a Schedule 5 protected species”.
The email states the landowner had been given 14 days to explain their position, and that the council may, depending on the answer, consider a hedgerow replacement notice.
“But that could be subject to appeal and so we need to ensure we have all the facts before we decide on that,” the statement said.
Interestingly, the latest plans claim that it would be possible to “achieve a 9.66 per cent gain in habitat units and 12.73 per cent gain in hedgerow units, using the biodiversity metric” – suggesting the developer believes work can be carried out in conjunction with the prospective homes to help accommodate more flora and fauna.
This controversy about the scheme comes on top of the fact an application at this site has previously been rejected by EDDC.
The plan for up to 63 homes on the land was refused by East Devon’s planning committee in November 2023, and an appeal was subsequently dismissed by the government’s Planning Inspectorate in December 2024.
Part of East Devon’s reason for refusal related to the fact the site was an area of open fields, and the application included the “removal of a hedgebank to provide vehicular access and visibility splays [which] would have a harsh and harmful urbanising effect on the character and appearance of the area”.
“The resulting development would fail to respect the local distinctiveness or maintain the rural qualities evident in this landscape,” the decision stated.
The new proposal is an outline one, meaning that even if it is passed by the EDDC planning committee, a subsequent plan would be required to confirm details such as the layout of the development and design of the properties.
The new plans state the northern and eastern boundaries of the site are demarcated by hedgerow, while the western boundary is formed by Sidmouth Road. It adds that the site is currently being used sporadically and informally as agricultural grazing land.
The developer adds that across the road from the proposed site is a development of 45 homes.
Documents state the new plan proposes a mix of housing, ranging in size from two- to four-bedroom houses with gardens and associated parking.
“To reflect the character of the area, the proposed dwellings are two-storey and will be consistent in terms of mass and style with adjoining development,” the plans state.
“The scheme includes provision for 50 per cent affordable housing – equivalent to 31 units based on a scheme of 63 units.”
A spokesperson for the agent, XL Planning, said the firm did not wish to comment on the application.
The planning application form states the applicant as a Mr Davis of ALD Developments. Companies House data suggests that firm was dissolved in 2016, but has essentially been replaced by Proper Flap & Jack Investments. Both companies list an Adam Lloyd Davis as being linked to the company.
Proper Flap & Jack does not appear to have an official website.