Page 210 - MJC submissions

The adjoining properties

Figure 2 Ashbourne House Wealden House
10. I support the development of the WH sites, but I submit that they must comply with the
spirit and words of the AWNP, as intended, and not permit exploitation of ambiguities. I
and the Ashbourne Park Owners’ Association (APOA) have made proposals on how our
objections could be resolved, cheaply and fairly. Incredibly, MSDC has not kept minutes
of its meetings with the developers, but appears not to have even raised our proposals as
points for discussion.

11. Recent correspondence (http://194.165.12.101/AnitePublicDocs/00614116.pdf) states that
rather than taking an independent role, MSDC has held meetings and had other contact
with the developer to, as planners admit, “move to a point where the applicants have
submitted an application that officers can support”. Officers have offered the developer
“informal” advice which is not recorded the planning portal or whose disclosure is
delayed by weeks. The result is that a state of secrecy is imposed and objectors, ambushed
and given insufficient time and information to react. This is akin to one party to judicial
proceedings being permitted unrestricted access to the judge while the other is locked in
the lavatory.
12. The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF: July 2018) states:

128. Design quality should be considered throughout the evolution and assessment
of individual proposals. Early discussion between applicants, the local planning
authority and local community about the design and style of emerging schemes is
important for clarifying expectations and reconciling local and commercial interests.
Applicants should work closely with those affected by their proposals to evolve
designs that take account of the views of the community. Applications that can
demonstrate early, proactive and effective engagement with the community should be
looked on more favourably than those that cannot.
13. The planned developments have been fouled by MSDC’s repeated disinterest in local
input or consultation. The application xxx was xxxxx

14. This includes deliberate and repeated circumvention of statutory requirements to consult
AWVC or residents and a one-sided, open-door policy to steer the developers towards a Page 4

E:\Cobasco\Personal, House and computer instructions\EDF and WH Development\MJC
Plans theories and Objectives\CONSOLIDATED SUBMISSIONS\4a Mr Ashcroft 7th Dec
2018.docx