Developer's broken promises

woolly_wombat

michael1234 wrote: »

Hi

They have already part completed the demolition part which was started before the s106 was in place (and thus the permission itself) so maybe by starting demolition before formal approval was enough to say that work had started prior to the conditions being satisfied (even though of course demolition by itself doesn't require pp)

Here's a quote from the ********** Village Action Group website which explains why demolition has been halted:

"..... despite conditions in the planning permission to protect a bat roost identified within the accommodation building by surveys carried out in 2015, the developers did nothing to avoid harm to the bats. As you know bats are protected animals and there should have been a bat mitigation strategy which included provision of replacement roosts. The Council sent a Planning Contravention Notice letter to the owner of the site at the beginning of July and they also notified the Wildlife Crime Officer at Thames Valley Police. All work was stopped and any new planning application at the site will need to be accompanied by updated bat surveys (depending on timing) and will have the same requirements for a bat mitigation strategy, landscaping and biodiversity enhancements."

The Bat Conservation Trust has a section on their website devoted to Reporting Bat Crimes for anyone who might be interested:
http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/reporting_bat_crimes.html

"Damage, destruction and obstruction of roosts are criminal offences and a police matter. So is disturbance of bats. "