WAVERLEY Borough Council has been accused of handing Brightwells developer Crest Nicholson “a licence to kill” - after councillors agreed to relax measures safeguarding a colony of protected pipistrelle bats set to be displaced by the redevelopment of East Street.

In 2013, a bat survey commissioned by Waverley’s development partner found roosts of both common and soprano pipistrelle bats in the roof-spaces of a number of buildings scheduled to be demolished to make way for Brightwells.

These included several “day and night” roosts in the Redgrave Theatre and two “maternity roosts” in Brightwell Cottage, a former gardener’s store in the grounds of Grade II-listed Brightwell House.

As a result of the 2013 survey, a number of mitigation measures were required by law to offset the loss of the roosts and in February 2015, Crest secured planning permission for a purpose-built ‘bat house’ in the southern part of the East Street site.

This permission has since expired, but rather than resubmit its plans for the bat house, last week Waverley’s joint planning committee was instead asked to determine an application for a trio of four-metre high bat poles as an alternative.

Crest states it has dropped the proposed bat house “due to fears it would get vandalised as Brightwell Cottage, in vicinity of the location of the bat house, has been subject to multiple occurrences of vandalism”.

However, leader of Waverley’s opposition Farnham Residents party, Jerry Hyman, has questioned the developer’s motives - arguing that Crest is being “a bit naughty” and never intended to build the bat house, adding the developer “does not care about protected species”.

“The proposed bat house has been removed - not because of vandalism - but because Crest slapped it right in the middle of a path that they can’t put anywhere else - I’ve been telling you about this for years,” Mr Hyman told fellow committee members.

“It was impractical, they’ve admitted it’s impractical, but they’re not replacing the mitigation for the maternity roosts that the 2013 bat report absolutely 100 per cent reported were there.”

The replacement of the bat house with three pole-mounted bat boxes was approved by statutory consultee Natural England last November and a bat mitigation licence, allowing Crest to demolish the buildings and displace the roosts, was amended accordingly.

“This licence has been submitted with the application,” stated a report to council by Waverley case officer Ruth Davey. “Officers are of the view, on the basis that Natural England is satisfied with proposal, that the bat boxes are a suitable alternative mitigation measure for the loss of bat roosts as a result of the East St redevelopment scheme.”

However, in a prickly exchange of views with officers, Mr Hyman pointed to the fact Natural England’s licence only allows for the removal of the day and night roosts - not the maternity roosts as identified in the 2013 survey.

He also stressed that Natural England has not undertaken its own bat survey of the site, instead relying on information provided by Crest, and that the bats issue has “always been left out” of the Environmental Impact Assessment for the wider Brightwells scheme.

Mr Hyman continued: “There is no mitigation for the loss of the maternity roosts, and as a result Natural England’s licence does not allow for Brightwell Cottage to be knocked down and bats taken out of it.

“We also know after the recent Habitats Directive ruling [by the European Court of Justice] that you have to conduct an assessment, which Natural England haven’t done.”

Mr Hyman added there was “no rush” to determine Crest’s application, with the developer unable to demolish the cottage in any case until the temporary A31 construction access is in place early next year, and called for the decision to be deferred to allow the impact on bats to be assessed.

Responding to Mr Hyman’s concerns, Waverley’s chief planning officer Elizabeth Sims told the committee the application was “a relatively insignificant matter in the overall scheme of things”, adding “we’re confident as officers that this has been submitted with the right amount of information” and “the mitigation is acceptable”.

She also urged the committee chairman, Elstead councillor David Else “to move this to a recommendation” - prompting an accusation by Farnham Residents councillor John Ward that she was overstepping her remit by seeking to “curtail the debate”.

Tory councillor Liz Townsend and the Lib Dem’s Paul Follows also expressed concern about the potential displacement of maternity roosts, and Tory member Michael Goodridge proposed an ‘informative’ as an alternative to a deferment, “making it clear that the applicant must not interfere with any maternity roosts”.

Mr Hyman praised the informative in principal, but warned that to grant the application - informative or not - would be to award Crest a “licence to kill”.

However, councillors eventually voted 13 in favour of Mr Goodridge’s revised recommendation to just four against.

* Waverley’s joint planning committee will meet again next Wednesday to determine Crest Nicholson’s application for a dual-lane temporary construction access, connecting the Brightwells site to the A31. Read more in next week’s Herald.