Page 226 - MJC submissions

site”. It is difficult to accept that “consideration” was achieved by destroying the
manor house and over-building its entire boundary with blocks of flats without a
word of explanation.

20. The file note also states that it was none other than Mr King (“SK”) who had taken part in
the 2016 consultation and:

“SK agreed that the allocation of 50+ units to the site originated with the Neighbourhood
Plan: it was an estimate that had not been the subject of detailed analysis. Agreed that the
eventual number of units would be a product of the design process.
21. This is a serious allegation: that Mr King had agreed that the “50+” figure was an
“estimate without the detailed analysis required” and that density would be dictated
entirely by design.

This is unacceptable and a breach of process.

22. Rather than responding with outrage, that words had been put in his mouth, Mr King
replied:
“Thank you for your meeting notes. I just have a couple of points of clarification. Firstly, in
para 1.3 the comment that it was an estimate that had not been the subject of a detailed
analysis was expressed by yourselves. As I was not involved in the process of the
Neighbourhood Plan examination I can’t comment on the details of how this policy (that is
the 50+ units) was arrived at.”
23. Mr King denied that he had been involved in the consultation but did not challenge his
alleged agreement that the developer could do almost what it liked subject to design. This
is the current position.

These inconsistencies, and the fact that DM/16/2845, relating to the pre-application
consultation is missing from MSDC’s website, is worrying.

1. In addition, the Wealden House sites are further protected by two specific local policies
(AWNP 9 [relating to the WH:EDF site] and AWNP 10 [relating to the WH:LIC site]).
These are summarised and compared on Attachment 10 and include:

• Schemes must reflect and respect the predominant character of the area with particular
regard to the unit type, scale and massing;

• --- have a layout which reflects and respects the spacious character of the locality;

• --- provide a mix of dwelling types;

• ---- demonstrate that the development can be achieved without harmful impact on the
amenity of residents of Ashbourne House and Carlton House;

• Show that the residential development is sensitively incorporated into the historic
character of buildings on the site.
Page 20
All of the above are violated in the current application

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